Differences between Pre and Post-Intervention Stages

participatory group are presented, commencing with:

- Differences in ATLs adopted,

- Differences in the subscale/s influencing ATL preference and - Differences in the influencing CDM subscales.

5.5.1. Differences in ATLs between Pre and Post-intervention

The proportion of the ATLs (deep, strategic and surface) adopted by the three participant groups, fluctuated between the Pre and Post-intervention stages for each of the participant groups (Table 37).

Table 37: ATL Comparison between Pre and Post-intervention

The strategic approach was the dominant approach of the three participant groups at the Pre and Post-intervention stages and increased from 41% at the Pre-intervention stage to 67% at the Post-intervention point. Participants’ preference for the deep approach increased for both the BSc (Hons) cohorts following the study’s intervention. The adoption of the surface approach decreased with all three participant groups. The BSc (Hons) groups decreased from 40% to 8.6% and none

ATL Comparison between Pre and Post-Intervention

ATLs Deep ATL Strategic ATL Surface ATL

Data Collection phase

Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post

n % n % n % n % n % n % B S c ( Ho ns ) Inner London 7 10% 8 11.4% 12 17% 23 33% 16 23% 4 5.7% Suburban 5 7% 8 11.4% 18 26% 25 36% 12 17% 2 2.8% Total 12 17% 16 22.8% 30 43% 48 69% 28 40% 6 8.6% PgDip 4 50% 4 50% 2 25% 4 50% 2 25% - - Total participants 16 21% 20 26% 32 41% 52 67% 30 38% 6 8%

of the PgDip participants indicated a preference for the surface approach at the Post- intervention stage.

5.5.2. Comparison of ATL preference between Pre and Post-intervention

stages

Figure 10: ATL comparison between Pre and Post-intervention stages ATL Comparison between Pre and Post-Intervention

All participant groups (N = 78)

The participants’ adoption of the deep approach increased at the end of the final academic year in comparison to their preference at the beginning of year (Figure 10). An affinity for the strategic approach increased by 26% between the two data collection stages. All three participant cohorts decreased their preference for the surface approach at the Post-intervention stage. This was evidenced by a decrease of 30% at the end of the academic year.

21%

41% 38%

Pre-Intervention ATLs Deep Strategic Surface

26%

67% 8%

Post-Intervention ATLs Deep Strategic Surface

5.5.3. Percentage changes in ATLs between Pre and Post-intervention

Figure 11: Percentage difference of ATL changes at Post-Intervention

Red= increase in %,Blue=decrease in %

Drawing from Table 37 detailing the comparison between ATLs at Pre and Post- intervention stages and Figure 10, the above Figure 11, illustrates that the adoption of the deep approach increased 5% and the strategic approach increased by 26% at the end of the participants’ final year. In comparison, students’ preference for the surface approach, decreased by 30%. These findings indicate that numerous participants were receptive to modifying their dominant ATL and thus open to embracing a new learning approach following the research intervention.

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%

5.5.4. Subscales influencing ATL preference at Pre and Post-

intervention

Table 38: Comparison of effective ATL subscales between Pre and Post-intervention

Comparison of subscales that affected ATL choice between Pre and Post-Intervention stages Wilks Lambda and Pairwise Comparison subscale findings

ATLs Deep ATL Strategic ATL Surface ATL

BSc (Hons) Inner London No change 1. Alertness to assessment* 1. Fear of failure 2. Achieving* 2. Syllabus boundedness 3. Monitoring effectiveness 3. Lack of purpose 4. Unrelated memorising Suburban 1. Relating ideas 1. Monitoring effectiveness 1. Fear of failure 2. Seeking meaning*

2. Organised study* 2. Unrelated memorising* 3. Time management* 3. Lack of purpose* 4. Alertness to assessment*

PgDip No change No change

1. Syllabus boundedness 2. Fear of failure * Additional Subscale detected at Post-Intervention analysis

The ATL subscales which influenced the adoption of participants preferred ATL changed between the Pre and Post-intervention stages (see Table 20 and Table 31). At the Post-intervention stage (Table 38), the BSc (Hons) participants’ choice of ATL was influenced by an increased number of subscales compared to their Pre- intervention findings. With the BSc (Hons) Suburban participants, the subscale ‘Seeking meaning’ combined with the ‘Relating ideas’ subscale which was yielded at the Pre-intervention stage, contributed to the preference for the deep approach at the Post-Intervention. The adoption of the strategic approach was further influenced by subscales, ‘Organised study’ and ‘Time management’, in addition to subscale ‘Alertness to assessment’ which affected both the BSc (Hons) cohorts. In addition to subscales ‘Fear of failure’ and ‘Syllabus boundness’ evidenced at the Pre- intervention stage, subscales ‘Unrelated memorising’ and ‘Lack of purpose’

contributed to the adoption of the surface approach for the BSc (Hons) participants at both the Inner London and Suburban campus sites at the Post-intervention analysis. In contrast to the PgDip cohort’s Pre-intervention subscale findings which influenced the use of the surface approach, the Post-intervention findings indicate that these subscales were no longer influential (Tables 20 and 31). As a result, none of the PgDip participants indicated a preference for the surface approach (Tables 26 and 37).

5.5.5. Differences in CDMNS subscales between Pre and Post-

intervention

CDMNS subscale median values changed for all participatory groups between the Pre and Post-intervention stages (Table 39). Additionally, subscales which scored the highest and lowest values changed at both data analysis stages. However, the BSc (Hons) Suburban participants scored the highest value on both data analysis points and the lowest subscale was scored by the BSc (Hons) Inner London students on both occasions.

Table 39: CDMNS subscale comparison at Pre and Post-Intervention stages

Comparison in CDMNS findings between Pre and Post-Intervention

Subscale Pre-Intervention Post-Intervention

Sample’s highest subscale Canvassing of Objectives and

Values Evaluation of Consequences

Sample’s lowest subscale Search for Alternatives Search for Information Group scoring highest subscale BSc (Hons) Suburban BSc (Hons) Suburban Group scoring lowest subscale BSc (Hons) Inner London BSc (Hons) Inner London